Capt. “Sully” Retires
According to a US Airways Press Release dated March 3, 2010, “Capt. Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger, who piloted Flight 1549 during its emergency water landing on the Hudson River in January 2009, and Flight Attendant Doreen Welsh, who helped guide 150 passengers to safety on the same flight, are retiring from US Airways today.” For the complete text of the US Airways Press Release, click here.
“Adverse Inference” in Miller v. Carley
With regards to the case of Miller v. Carley, Charles A. Painter writes about how and when an “Adverse Inference” should be drawn. Find the summary in our Municipal Library.
Jeanne speaks at Ontario Traffic Conference
Jeanne Craig gave a talk about the Liability of Road Authorities for Non-Repair of Highways at the Ontario Traffic Conference in March. This was Jeanne’s 18th year speaking at the conference.
Skyservice goes into Receivership
Toronto-based Charter airline, Skyservice, went into Receivership on March 31, 2010. According to its website, “On March 31, 2010, FTI Consulting Canada Inc. was appointed as Receiver pursuant to an Order of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice of all the assets, undertakings and properties of Skyservice Airlines Inc.” The Application for a Receiver was brought by Thomas Cook Canada Inc. For a copy of the Order, click here.
Amendments to Minimum Maintenance Standards
Effective February 18, 2010, the amendments to the Minimum Maintenance Standards came into full force. Read Charles A. Painter’s recent summary of the changes in our Municipal Library.
Clay is successful in case re: Insurer/Administrator
Clay Hunter brought a Rule 21 motion on behalf of Air Canada to dismiss the action on the grounds that the court did not have jurisdiction given the Supreme Court’s decision in Weber v. Ontario Hydro, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 929 and the Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision in Pilon v. International Minerals & Chemical Corp (Canada) (1991), 141 D.L.R. (4th) 72 wherein it was held “that the task of the judge or arbitrator in determining the appropriate forum for the proceedings centers on whether the dispute between the parties arises out of the collective agreement.” In the instant case, Dzehverovic v. Air Canada and Great West Life, Mr. Justice Penny of the Ontario Superior Court found that the group disability income plan was incorporated into the collective agreement and therefore that it was “plain, obvious and beyond doubt that the essential character of the dispute falls within the parameters of the collective agreement”, staying the action against Air Canada and Great West Life.
Clay’s success continues with win in case re: a resort’s alleged inadequacies or a plaintiff’s unreasonable expectations
Clay Hunter recently succeeded at trial wherein the plaintiffs claimed against Air Canada Vacations for damages in negligent misrepresentation and breach of contract for an alleged “ruined vacation”. Plaintiffs claimed that the tour operator was responsible for the alleged poor quality of the resort and or enticing the plaintiffs to purchase their tour package by misrepresenting the quality of the resort. The Court found that Air Canada Vacations was allowed to rely on the terms of its contract, as set out in its brochure and on its website and, in particular, the limitation of liability with respect to third party suppliers (the resort) contained therein to exclude it from liability. The Court further found that the brochure and website were clear and easily intelligible and contained no misleading, untrue or inaccurate representations. Notwithstanding the plaintiffs’ disappointment with their vacation, the court held that “the irresistible inference is that the plaintiffs never really gave the resort a fair chance to live up to their expectations.” The action was dismissed. In its follow up decision on costs, the Court exercised its displeasure with the plaintiffs litigating this matter in the Superior Court and, even taking into account the principles of proportionality, awarded, in our view, an extraordinary costs award. One hopes the decision will serve to dissuade future ill conceived litigation targeting tour operators.